Beta C-Mags

[Mahatatain]

Does anyone know when Beta C-Mags (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beta_c-mag) became available IRL as I'm trying to figure out whether they are feasible for a T2k game?

I've seen a reference on Wiki that mentions "Coil Magazines" for 7.62x51mm weapons from the "early 1990's" and the H&K MG-36 was released in 1997 (I think) and that was designed to be used with the C-Mag (again, according to Wiki). It therefore sounds feasible to me that a rare 5.56x45mm C-Mag or two could exist in a T2k game but I'm not certain.

As you can see my information is not very reliable so I wondered if anyone knows much about the C-Mag and when it became available, both in terms of general supply to troops and, prior to that, as a rare item amongst special forces types.

Thanks for any information/help.

[Raellus]

My copy of Osprey's Panama 1989-1990 has a color plate (F3) of a USN SEAL carrying an Colt Carbine fitted with a Beta C-mag twin 100 round drum magazine. So, it looks like USSF had access to them no later than '89. In the T2KU, I reckon most NATO SF using compatible weapons would have access to such magazines.

[Mahatatain]

Originally Posted by Raellus

My copy of Osprey's Panama 1989-1990 has a color plate (F3) of a USN SEAL carrying an Colt Carbine fitted with a Beta C-mag twin 100 round drum magazine. So, it looks like USSF had access to them no later than '89. In the T2KU, I reckon most NATO SF using compatible weapons would have access to such magazines.

Thanks for the info Rae - that's a hell of a lot earlier than I thought was the case!

[StainlessSteelCynic]

The patent for the C-Mag was filed in April 1987
Here's a link to the patent document
http://www.google.com/patents?id=A6s...page&q&f=false

According to this website, the US Army tested the C-Mag recently in Afghanistan and found it had problems. Typically these were jams and failures to accept the stated 100-rds into the mag.
http://www.defendamerica.mil/article.../a072803b.html

[raketenjagdpanzer]

The soldier in the foreground on my 1.0 boxed set has an M16 sporting one.

[Mahatatain]

Thanks for the help.

Originally Posted by StainlessSteelCynic

The patent for the C-Mag was filed in April 1987
Here's a link to the patent document
http://www.google.com/patents?id=A6s...page&q&f=false

According to this website, the US Army tested the C-Mag recently in Afghanistan and found it had problems. Typically these were jams and failures to accept the stated 100-rds into the mag.
http://www.defendamerica.mil/article.../a072803b.html

Thanks for the date.

From the research I've done I think that they are susceptible to breakage, particularly if dropped or bashed. They therefore sound like a good option but shouldn't be exclusively relied upon.

Originally Posted by raketenjagdpanzer

The soldier in the foreground on my 1.0 boxed set has an M16 sporting one.

I'd forgotten about that. Being picky though I don't think that that is a Beta C-Mag in the drawing as its got one drum not two. What other extended mags were available at the time? Does anyone know?

[raketenjagdpanzer]

Originally Posted by Mahatatain

Thanks for the help.


Thanks for the date.

From the research I've done I think that they are susceptible to breakage, particularly if dropped or bashed. They therefore sound like a good option but shouldn't be exclusively relied upon.


I'd forgotten about that. Being picky though I don't think that that is a Beta C-Mag in the drawing as its got one drum not two. What other extended mags were available at the time? Does anyone know?

Actually taking a closer look, it looks like a smaller version of the a drum magazine, the type of which the bad guys used in the North Hollywood bank robbery shootout.

[Rockwolf66]

Originally Posted by raketenjagdpanzer

The soldier in the foreground on my 1.0 boxed set has an M16 sporting one.

That's not a C-mag that's a Modified RPK drum magazine. I've heard of them for a Mini-14 and they carry about 90 rounds.

[LAW0306]

if 100 round mags worked then everyone would have one.

[Medic]

Some people have a fixation about huge magazines on their assault rifles. However, I can come up with several reasons why they are not a good idea.

First of all, with an undisciplined firing style, a large magazine tends to lead to the barrel heating up much more than it should, which can cause it to warp. This will lead to the weapon becoming less accurate at first and if not noticed, even barrel blockage.

Second thing is the magazine itself. The big magazines are often unreliable if filled to the maximum capacity and tend to be both bulky and get in the way when firing from prone position.

I talked with a Finnish Army weaponsmith once and he kept cursing, how (especially) the younger officers often dream about a 100-round magazine on an assault rifle instead of the standard issue 30-round one. Since Finnish Army has modified assault rifles with such magazines for use as auxilliary weapon for the NSV heavy machinegun (due to the fact, the 7.62x39mm has a smaller safety zone on the firing range than 12.7x108mm), some actually manage to obtain such a magazine from the armory and usually destroy an assault rifle testing it.

[ArmySGT.]

I think their place is in the Defense and if you have set up an ambush.

In each case your not moving around and probably not slamming yourself to the ground.

On foot patrol or in MOUT. No too heavy.

The early ones were fragile but, with plastics today durable enough.

[bobcat]

i have heard vastly differing accounts of the performance of these magazines. in my experience they're damned good for some applications(ie. when in a vehicle, ambush, or in a defensive position) i've not encountered the commonly cited jamming issues but with 12 magazines i didn't have a sufficient sample for an accurate test.

[Tegyrius]

I'm somewhat interested in Surefire's quad-stack 60-round AR magazines. The form factor seems a little more compact than that of a drum.

- C.

[Rockwolf66]

Originally Posted by Tegyrius

I'm somewhat interested in Surefire's quad-stack 60-round AR magazines. The form factor seems a little more compact than that of a drum.

- C.

I know of a guy who keep one in the "pistol" he keeps under his bed. I'll have to talk him into letting me try it out sometime.

[waiting4something]

Originally Posted by raketenjagdpanzer

The soldier in the foreground on my 1.0 boxed set has an M16 sporting one.

The magazine on the box cover is actually a drawing of a Firepower Inc. Firepower Assault Magazine. That drum always got me curious to what it was or if it was just something the artist dreamed up from a RPK drum. Then when I finally saw them on auctions I was like "that's it"! It was the one real thing I bought because of that box cover.

[waiting4something]

Magazines are always made of mixed reviews. I have heard both about BETA C's. I have only used mine about 4 times and it always worked, but maybe it wasn't made on a Friday either. I heard the same for the Surefire quads.

[HorseSoldier]

if 100 round mags worked then everyone would have one.

Agreed. The Beta C Mags didn't really catch on because they earned a bad reputation for poor reliability and durability. Even in the SOF world in the mid/late 2000s I never saw anyone rolling with one, even to screw around with on the range.

I'm somewhat interested in Surefire's quad-stack 60-round AR magazines. The form factor seems a little more compact than that of a drum.

Adds some weight to the gun, but no significant change to handling. It's not super clear in the photo below, but I ran one as my mag in the gun on this last trip over and it was 100% reliable. (I thought about switching over to Surefire 60s entirely, but when each one costs the same as 4-6 PMags, it seemed a bit prohibitive. Was nice to have sixty rounds in the gun if things went sideways, however.)

[Mahatatain]

Just in case anyone wants to include Beta C-Mags in their T2k campaigns I've found a brochure that details the years the different versions of the C-Mags were developed for particular weapons. The brochure is here: http://www.newhopeadvertising.com/Sa...G_brochure.pdf

According to the brochure the details are:

1987 – M16/M4/AR15 (didn’t the M4 go into service in 1994 though?)
1988 – C-Mag Speed Loader
1990 – Steyr AUG
1991 – M249 SAW/FN Minimi (presumably this slots in like a 30 rnd mag and will be really unwieldy?)
1997 – G36
2000 – MP5
2001 – HK33
2004 – SIG 550/551
2005 – Mini-14
2010 – Uzi/G3/HK91/FN FAL and STANAG

Based on the discussions and comments in the posts above I will be giving them a massive unreliability factor in my T2k campaigns as the early ones obviously had problems. One would make a good unusual item for PCs to discover though.

Originally Posted by waiting4something

The magazine on the box cover is actually a drawing of a Firepower Inc. Firepower Assault Magazine. That drum always got me curious to what it was or if it was just something the artist dreamed up from a RPK drum. Then when I finally saw them on auctions I was like "that's it"! It was the one real thing I bought because of that box cover.

From everything that I've read on the internet the Firepower Assault Magazine appears to be even more unreliable than the early Beta C-Mags. I believe (please correct me if I'm wrong someone) that it is designed to hold 70 rounds but suffers increased problems with jams if you load more than 50 in it. Even with 50 in it there is quite a risk with a jam.

I also believe that it is slow and awkward to reload as you have to turn a clockwork "winder" as you load individual rounds.

Does anyone have any idea how much one might weigh? They look heavy to me.

[HorseSoldier]

1987 – M16/M4/AR15 (didn’t the M4 go into service in 1994 though?)

It's all the same mag well, so while ahistoric it's accurate enough.

I have to agree that a 100 round mag strapped to a SAW through the box mag port sounds like a nightmare. I wonder if they figured out a way to make it more reliable feeding than standard 30 round magazines in the SAW. (I'd hope that that's what the version for SAW thing is about, since it's also more or less the same magazine well as on ARs -- though my Surefire 60 I carried in AFG wouldn't fit into SAWs.)

[waiting4something]

The Firepower Assault Magazine to me weighs about the same as a Beta C mag. I don't have a scale for measuring the two accurately, but they feel about the same. The Firepower mag is more then likely a piece of junk. I bought it solely for the box cover of the V1 edition. I have never used mine, but I found one for my brother also, and he used his. He was only able to put like 30 rounds in it, but I suspect and hope it fits more then that.
It's true you have to load each round one at a time and work the lever on the magazine with each round just like on a Russian or Romanian RPK 75 round drum. The real goofy thing about this drum is the last few rounds in the drum don't make it to the top of the magazine so you will never fire off all your rounds. It's hard to explain, but there is nothing to help get the last remaining rounds to the top of the magazine. It's a cool item to have, I just wouldn't use it if I had to fight the fight.

[Tegyrius]

Originally Posted by waiting4something

The real goofy thing about this drum is the last few rounds in the drum don't make it to the top of the magazine so you will never fire off all your rounds. It's hard to explain, but there is nothing to help get the last remaining rounds to the top of the magazine. It's a cool item to have, I just wouldn't use it if I had to fight the fight.

Clearly designed for a modernized Bren that takes STANAG magazines...

- C.

[ArmySGT.]

Originally Posted by Tegyrius

Clearly designed for a modernized Bren that takes STANAG magazines...

- C.

L4A3

[Tegyrius]

I'll take two.

- C.

[ArmySGT.]

http://www.betaco.com/cmag_products.asp





I still want one.

[Mahatatain]

Originally Posted by waiting4something

The Firepower Assault Magazine to me weighs about the same as a Beta C mag. I don't have a scale for measuring the two accurately, but they feel about the same. The Firepower mag is more then likely a piece of junk. I bought it solely for the box cover of the V1 edition. I have never used mine, but I found one for my brother also, and he used his. He was only able to put like 30 rounds in it, but I suspect and hope it fits more then that.
It's true you have to load each round one at a time and work the lever on the magazine with each round just like on a Russian or Romanian RPK 75 round drum. The real goofy thing about this drum is the last few rounds in the drum don't make it to the top of the magazine so you will never fire off all your rounds. It's hard to explain, but there is nothing to help get the last remaining rounds to the top of the magazine. It's a cool item to have, I just wouldn't use it if I had to fight the fight.

Very interesting and thanks for the info. When I next run some T2k face to face I think that the PCs might find one of these Firepower mags at some point, just so that I can increase the chances of them having a jam etc!

Originally Posted by Tegyrius

Clearly designed for a modernized Bren that takes STANAG magazines...

Tegyrius - sorry, I'm confused. What do you mean?

Thanks.

[ArmySGT.]

Originally Posted by Mahatatain

Tegyrius - sorry, I'm confused. What do you mean?

Thanks.

The follower doesn't push the last few round up to the action for the bolt to snag them and feed them into the chamber.

A top feeding MG like the Bren would mean the rounds are pushed downward and despite the follower, gravity would bring the rounds into position at the breech.

[Mahatatain]

Originally Posted by ArmySGT.

The follower doesn't push the last few round up to the action for the bolt to snag them and feed them into the chamber.

A top feeding MG like the Bren would mean the rounds are pushed downward and despite the follower, gravity would bring the rounds into position at the breech.

Ah - that makes sense. Thanks for explaining.

[BigEd_3]

No longer have my old email account (and I moved) so I re-registered.

It started a long time ago but with RPD mags.

"The SEALs also would take RPD drums that were captured and cobble together mounts in the field to use them on the Stoner."

Link here:
http://home.comcast.net/~sfischer397/stoner/feed.htm

Armorers in vietnam would also fabricate AK mags that fit M16's. The franken-mag would hold more ammo, and were used by the Point Man. The logic behind a larger magazine capacity would be reaction by a higher than normal volume of fire when spotted or ambushed. The one magazine was used, then use of normal capacity used thereafter.

Pics of the mags are rare, but there are a half dozen pictures floating on the web...

http://img90.imageshack.us/img90/6707/akm1611.jpg

http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:A...fkinw84iIcbaqE

http://s171.photobucket.com/albums/u...RVNofficer.jpg

http://www.hunt101.com/data/500/23482925vy8.jpg

[HorseSoldier]

That hybrid mag set-up is interesting. The only picture I've ever seen of one was in a power point slide for some training the USAF was the proponent agency for. Everyone in the room, myself included, thought it was a staged photo involving an airman who did not know better (though none of us could explain how to get an AK mag into an AR mag well. Now I'm inclined to believe it was one of the VN-era mags shown in the photos.

Learn something new everyday.

[Raellus]

Wow. I've seen literally thousands of photos from Vietnam and don't recall ever seeing one of those mags. Thanks for posting them.